Critical Reviews in Biotechnology

ISSN: 0738-8551 (Print) 1549-7801 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ibty20

A Review of Plastic Waste Biodegradation

Ying Zheng, Ernest K. Yanful & Amarjeet S. Bassi

To cite this article: Ying Zheng, Ernest K. Yanful & Amarjeet S. Bassi (2005) A Review
of Plastic Waste Biodegradation, Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 25:4, 243-250, DOI:
10.1080/07388550500346359

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07388550500346359

Published online: 10 Oct 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1920

View related articles

Citing articles: 99 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ibty20
Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 25:243–250, 2005
Copyright
c Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 0738-8551 print / 1549-7801 online
DOI: 10.1080/07388550500346359
A Review of Plastic Waste Biodegradation
Ying Zheng and
Ernest K. Yanful
Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering
Amarjeet S. Bassi
Department of Chemical and
Biochemical Engineering
The University of Western
Ontario, London, Ontario,
Canada
Address correspondence to Amarjeet
S. Bassi, Department of Chemical and
Biochemical Engineering. The
University of Western Ontario,
London, Ontario N6A 5B9, Canada.
E-mail: abassi@uwo.ca
ABSTRACT With more and more plastics being employed in human lives
and increasing pressure being placed on capacities available for plastic waste
disposal, the need for biodegradable plastics and biodegradation of plastic
wastes has assumed increasing importance in the last few years. This review
looks at the technological advancement made in the development of more eas-
ily biodegradable plastics and the biodegradation of conventional plastics by
microorganisms. Additives, such as pro-oxidants and starch, are applied in syn-
thetic materials to modify and make plastics biodegradable. Recent research has
shown that thermoplastics derived from polyolefins, traditionally considered
resistant to biodegradation in ambient environment, are biodegraded follow-
ing photo-degradation and chemical degradation. Thermoset plastics, such as
aliphatic polyester and polyester polyurethane, are easily attacked by microor-
ganisms directly because of the potential hydrolytic cleavage of ester or urethane
bonds in their structures. Some microorganisms have been isolated to utilize
polyurethane as a sole source of carbon and nitrogen source. Aliphatic-aromatic
copolyesters have active commercial applications because of their good mechan-
ical properties and biodegradability. Reviewing published and ongoing studies
on plastic biodegradation, this paper attempts to make conclusions on poten-
tially viable methods to reduce impacts of plastic waste on the environment.
KEYWORDS thermoplastics, polyolefins, additive, thermoset plastics, polyester,
polyurethane.
1. INTRODUCTION
Plastics are man-made long chain polymeric molecules.30 They are widely
used, economical materials characterized by excellent all-round properties, easy
molding and manufacturing. Traditionally plastics are very stable and not read-
ily degraded in the ambient environment. As a result, environmental pollution
from synthetic plastics has been recognized as a large problem. For instance,
statistics published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in
2003 indicated that, before recycling, approximately 236 million tons of mu-
nicipal solid waste (MSW) was generated in the United States in that year, of
which 11.3% was composed of plastics.32 Only a small fraction of this plastic
waste (mostly soft drink and other bottles) was recovered.32 Thus the remain-
ing quantity of plastic waste was required to be disposed. Most of this plastic
waste has been accumulating in landfills. Therefore, in order to save capacity
for plastic waste disposal, there is a growing interest both in the development
243
of newer, readily biodegradable plastics and in the TABLE 1 Main plastics and their applications (the list is not
exhaustive).
biodegradation of conventional plastic waste. The
present study reviews current research in these areas. Plastics Applications

Low density polyethylene Films and packaging

2. TYPES OF PLASTICS AND USAGE (LDPE), linear low density
polyethylene (LLDPE),
2.1. Types of Plastics and Properties polyvinylchloride (PVC)
for Degradation Polyethylene terephthalate Bottles, tubes, pipes,
(PET), PVC, high density insulation molding
Plastics are synthetic polymers. There are two main polyethylene (HDPE)
processes in the manufacture of synthetic polymers. Polystyrene (PS), Tanks, jugs, containers
The first involves breaking the double bond in the polypropylene (PP), PVC
original olefin by additional polymerization to form LDPE, LLDPE Bags
Polyurethane (PUR) Coating, insulation, paints,
new carbon-carbon bonds, the carbon-chain polymers.
packing
For example, the fabrication of polyolefins, such as
polyethylene and polypropylene, is based on this gen-
eral reaction. The second process is the elimination of polyethylene (LDPE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene
water (or condensation) between a carboxylic acid and (PS) and other resins. The major classes of thermosetting
an alcohol or amine to form polyester or polyamide. plastics include polyester, one of which is polyethylene
Polyurethane is also made by this general reaction.30 terephthalate (PET), and polyurethane (PUR).6
Plastics are divided into two groups: thermoplastics Table 2 shows percentage distribution of plastic resins
and thermoset plastics.2 Thermoplastics are the prod- in terms of sales and use in 2004 in the United States,
ucts of the first kind of general reaction mentioned Canada and Mexico, published by The American Plas-
above. Thermoplastics can be repeatedly softened and tics Association.5 It is notable that 92% of plastics
hardened by heating and cooling. In thermoplastics, the employed are non-biodegradable thermoplastics. As
atoms and molecules are joined end-to-end into a series a consequence, the environmental impact caused by
of long, sole carbon chains. These long carbon chains thermoplastics, the main packaging materials, is a ma-
are independent of the others.3 This structure in which jor concern. To deal with this environmental prob-
the backbone is solely built of carbon atoms makes ther- lem related to non-biodegradable thermoplastics, re-
moplastics resistant to degradation or hydrolytic cleav- search to modify non-biodegradable thermoplastics to
age of chemical bonds. Consequently, thermoplastics biodegradable materials is of great interest. Although
are considered non-biodegradable plastics. Thermoset thermoset plastics comprise only 8% of the total
plastics are synthesized from the second kind of gen- amount of plastics,5 their susceptibility to biodegrada-
eral reaction stated above. They are solidified after being tion also raises attention. Several investigations have
melted by heating. The process of changing from the liq-
uid state to the solid state is irreversible.2 Distinguished TABLE 2 Percentage distribution of plastic resins: sales and
captive use in North America (2004) (5 adapted from American
from the linear structure of thermoplastics, thermoset Plastics Council Year End Statistics 2004).
plastics have a highly cross-linked structure.2,30 Since
Type of plastic resin Percentage distribution
the main chain of thermoset plastics is made of hetero-
atoms, it is possible that they are potentially susceptible Polypropylene (PP) 18.4%
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) 15.8%
to be degraded by the hydrolytic cleavage of chemical
Polystyrene (PS) 6.7%
bonds such as ester bonds or amide bonds.23 High density polyethylene 17.4%
(HDPE)
2.2. Application of Plastics Low density polyethylene (LDPE) 8.2%
Linear low density polyethylene 12.1%
Thermoplastics are widely used in packaging and (LLDPE)
fabrication of bottles and films (Table 1). The ma- Other thermoplastics 12.5%
jor types of thermoplastic material include linear, low- Thermoplastics total 92.0%
density polyethylene (LLDPE), high density polyethy- Thermosets and other plastics 8.0%
Total 100%
lene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), low density

Y. Zheng et al. 244

been carried out on the biodegradation of thermo-set
plastics such as polyurethane and are discussed later.
2.3. Biodegradable
Plastics—Limitations and Obstacles
for Use
Table 3 shows some of the different types of
biodegradable plastics being considered. New applica-
tions based on synthetic polyester–based biodegradable
resins have been commercialized, especially in the pack-
aging industry, paper coating and garbage bags. These
polyesters are made using modified polyethylene poly-
merization processes and as blends. A second–class of
biodegradable polyesters include polylactic acid and
thermoplastic starch-based polymers. These polyesters
environmentally degrade to water and carbon dioxide
when exposed to microorganisms and water in com-
posting piles. A third type of biodegradable plastics in-
cludes aliphatic co-polyesters such as polyhydroxyalka-
noates or PHAs produced by bacteria. Potato, corn and
wheat starch are renewable raw materials for starch–
based plastics. While a number of alternatives have
emerged, one of the main limitations for synthetic
biodegradable polymers such as polyesters and starch–
based blends is higher cost compared to synthetic poly-
mers such as LDPE, PP, PS, and PET. Another serious
obstacle is a lack of suitable infrastructure for sorting,
recycling and composting solid wastes.
3. DEGRADATION OF
THERMOPLASTIC POLYOLEFINS
Generally speaking, synthetic polyolefins are inert
materials whose backbones consist of only long car-
bon chains.36 This characteristic structure makes poly-
olefins non-susceptible to degradation by microorgan-
isms. However, a comprehensive study of polyolefin
biodegradation has shown that some microorganisms
could utilize polyolefins with low molecular weight.36
This biodegradation always follows photo-degradation
and chemical degradation. Although traditional poly-
olefins are non-biodegradable, their biodegradability
is enhanced when blending with starch or other
polyesters. Zuchowska et al.38 investigated the degra-
dation of blends of low density polyethylene (PE) or
isotactic polypropylene (PP) with glycerol plasticized
starch (GS). Glycerol mono-ethers, fatty alcohols or
245
epoxidized rubber were required as compatibilizers. The
results showed that the blends were subject to different
kinds of degradation. However, the degree of degrada-
tion was a function of the type of polymer and the
blend composition. The biodegradation of the poly-
olefin chain was clearly observed. Therefore, with the
development of starch-plastic as well as the discovery of
other additives added to synthetic plastics, biodegrad-
able polyolefins provide an attractive option for reduc-
ing plastic waste in the environment.4 The following
section reviews biodegradable polyolefins and specifi-
cally examines the degradation of polyethylene (PP).
3.1. Biodegradable Polyolefins
Traditionally, polyolefins are considered to be non-
biodegradable for three reasons. First, the hydropho-
bic character of polyolefins makes this material resis-
tant to hydrolysis. Secondly, the use of anti-oxidants
and stabilizers during manufacture keeps polyolefins
from oxidation and biodegradation.17 Thirdly, poly-
olefins have high molecular weights36 of 4000 to 28,000.
Therefore, to make polyolefins biodegradable, these fac-
tors have to be considered. The study of Bonhomme
et al.7 indicated that the molecular weight of biodegrad-
able polyolefins must be less than 500. Accordingly,
the principle of making biodegradable polyolefins in-
volves adding special additives to the synthetic poly-
olefins so that the modified structures are suscepti-
ble to photo-degradation and chemical degradation.
As a result, the long carbon chains are broken to
shorter segments and their molecular weights are re-
duced below 500. Microorganisms can then assimilate
the polyolefins monomeric and oligomeric breakdown
products previously derived from photo and chemical
degradations.7,36,39
As commercial products, synthetic polyolefins resist
oxidation and biodegradation because of the presence
of anti-oxidants and stabilizers. The use of pro-oxidant
additives makes polyolefins oxo-bio-degradable. First,
pro-oxidant activities can change the polyolefins’
surface from hydrophobic character to hydrophilic.
Secondly, pro-oxidants can catalyze the breakdown the
long chain of polyolefins and produce lower molecular
weight products either during photolysis or thermoly-
sis. Jakubowicz17 studied the thermo-oxidative degra-
dation of polyethylene films during composting condi-
tions and in the presence of pro-oxidant additives. He
found that metal combinations were the most active
A Review of Plastic Waste Biodegradation
TABLE 3 Biodegradable plastics (21 adapted from Leaversuch).
Type of Names of
biodegradable plastic Applications some manufacturers Limitations for use

Synthetic polyester blends Flexible films and tubing. Dupont 1. Higher cost
(Amorphous) Properties similar to LDPE 2. Lack of infrastructure for
disposal such as composting
and recycling
Semi-crystalline polyesters Rigid Containers, packing Dupont 3. May require blending with
Aromatic-Aliphatic General purpose and Eastman, other polyesters or polymers
Copolyesters films, lawn and garden BASF to obtain desired properties
bags, netting, food wraps 4. Bacterial derived
Polylactic acid Coatings Cargill-Dow biopolymers such as
Starch based blends Films, packing, packaging Novamont PHAs will require
Polyhydroxyalkanoates Film, sheets, elastomers Proctor and more experimental
(PHAs) Gamble testing and evaluation
Polycaprolactone Films, sheets, packaging, Union Carbide,
coatings Dow Performance
Chemicals

pro-oxidants. To be active as catalysts, it is necessary
that two metal ions of similar stability be involved in
the metal combinations, and also when the two metal
ions are oxidized by oxidants, the oxidation number of
the metal ion must be only one unit different from the
one before oxidation. For example, Mn (manganese)
is a suitable metal participating in metal combination
for pro-oxidant activity. As an oxidation-reduction cat-
alyst, two Mn2+ ions with similar stability can form
and would be oxidized to Mn3+ and then later reduced
to Mn2+ . Thus, when polyolefins are exposed to the
environment, a free radical chain in the material can
react with oxygen from the atmosphere and produce
hydro-peroxides that can, in turn, be hydrolyzed and
photolyzed. Also the pro-oxidant catalyzes the reaction
of chain scission in the polymer, producing low molec-
ular mass oxidation products, such as carboxylic acids,
alcohols and ketones. Furthermore, peroxidation modi-
fies the material surface character from hydrophobic to
hydrophilic. Consequently, microorganisms can access
the material surface, bio-assimilate the low molecular
mass, hydrophilic oxidant products and facilitate the
biodegradation process.
Starch can also be blended into the polymers for
producing biodegradable polyolefins.27,28,38 However,
as mentioned earlier, without the addition of a suitable
pro-oxidant system, biodegradation will simply cause
the removal of starch and leave behind shorter chains
of unmodified polyolefin.
The amount of starch required to be added to syn-
thetic polyolefins needs to be optimized. If the amount
of starch is too high, the mechanical properties of the
material may be adversely affected. On the contrary, if
the amount of starch is too low, the material may not
biodegrade.9,38 For instance, an experiment was con-
ducted by Zuchowska et al.38 to examine properties
of starch blends containing 40% polyolefin and 60%
plasticized starch (40 PE-SG) or 50% polyolefin and
50% plasticized starch (50 PP-SG). The results showed
that after aging in soil for four months, both samples
had a very large weight loss (ca. 55 or 43%), indicat-
ing the degradation of materials. The 40 PE-SG, with
higher starch content, lost more weight, implying more
material was degraded. Relative changes in mechani-
cal properties showed that the tensile strength of both
blends did not change significantly, whereas elongation
at break changed considerably, especially in the blend
containing higher amounts of starch. The addition of
starch to polyolefins modifies their structure. Therefore,
in starch blends, there is a continuous starch phase that
is favorable to microorganisms and is easily attacked
by microorganisms under the catalytic action of α- and
β- amylase enzymes. Under the effect of this reaction,
the continuous starch phase is removed, resulting in
porous polyolefin starch blends. If pro-oxidants are also
present, an accelerated degradation of polyolefins ma-
trix will occur.38
3.2. Biodegradation of Polyethylene
Since polyethylene (PE) is widely used as pack-
aging material (Table 2), considerable research not

Y. Zheng et al. 246

only on biodegradable polyethylene but also on
biodegradation of polyethylene has been recently
conducted.7,8,11,12,17,34 The results of these studies
indicated that polyethylene was biodegraded follow-
ing photo-degradation and/or chemical degradation.
Biodegradation of polyethylene is known to occur
by two mechanisms: hydro-biodegradation and oxo-
biodegradation.7 These two mechanisms agree with
the modifications due to the two additives, starch
and pro-oxidant, used in the synthesis of biodegrad-
able polyethylene. Starch blend polyethylene has a
continuous starch phase that makes the material hy-
drophilic and, therefore, catalyzed by amylase en-
zymes. Microorganisms can easily access, attack and
remove this part. Thus the hydrophilic polyethylene
with the matrix continues to be hydro-biodegraded. For
the biodegradable polyethylene synthesized by adding
pro-oxidant additive, biodegradation occurs following
photo-degradation and chemical degradation. As men-
tioned in section 3.1, the pro-oxidant is a metal com-
bination. After transition metal catalyzed thermal per-
oxidation, biodegradation of the low molecular weight
oxidation products occurs sequentially.7,11,36 Ei-Shafei
et al.11 investigated the ability of fungi and Streptomyces
strains to attack degradable polyethylene consisting
of disposed polyethylene bags containing 6% starch.
Microorganisms employed in the investigation were
eight different isolated Streptomyces strains and two fungi
Mucor rouxii NRRL 1835 and Aspergillus flavus. After
ten days of heat treatment, polyethylene films were
incubated and shaken at 125 rpm at 30◦ C in 0.6%
yeast extract medium (pH 7.5) for Streptomyces spp.
and in 3% yeast extract medium (pH 5.5) for fungi.
Active enzymes were detected and biodegradation of
polyethylene was confirmed by testing changes in me-
chanical properties, such as tensile strength and percent
elongation. Yamada-Onodera et al.36 isolated a strain
of the fungus Penicillium simplicissimum YK to biode-
grade polyethylene. They also discussed pretreatment of
polyethylene before fungus cultivation to make degra-
dation more complete. In contrast to the research done
by Ei-Shafei et al.11 that used polyethylene-containing
starch as a carbon source to help microorganisms grow,
Yamada-Onodera et al.36 investigated biodegradation of
polyethylene without additives. UV light or oxidizing
agents, such as a UV sensitizer, were used at the be-
ginning of the process to activate an inert material,
polyethylene. Polyethylene was also treated with ni-
tric acid at 80◦ C for 6 days before cultivation with
247
inserted functional groups that were susceptible to mi-
croorganisms. The experimental result showed that with
the fungus activity, polyethylene with a starting molec-
ular weight in the range of 4000 to 28,000 was de-
graded to units with a lower molecular weight of 500
after three months of liquid cultivation, which indi-
cated the biodegradation of this polyethylene. Over-
all, polyethylene degradation is a combined photo- and
bio-degradation process. First, either by abiotic oxida-
tion (UV light exposure) or heat treatment, essential
abiotic precursors are obtained. Secondly, selected ther-
mophilic microorganisms degrade the low molar mass
oxidation products to complete the biodegradation.7
4. DEGRADATION OF THERMOSET
PLASTICS, POLYESTER AND
POLYURETHANE
Thermoset plastics, such as polyester and
polyurethane, have recently become materials of
considerable interest because of their potential
biodegradability. It was found that due to their hy-
drolysable ester bonds, polyester and polyurethane are
biodegradable.3,14,23,24,33
4.1. Degradation of Polyesters
There are two kinds of polyesters: aliphatic and aro-
matic. Their biodegradability is completely different.
Muller et al.23 concluded that pure aromatic polyesters
are quite insensitive to any hydrolytic degradation. It
was observed that direct microbial or enzymatic at-
tack of pure aromatic polyester was not significant.22,31
However, other research has recently claimed that aro-
matic polyester could be disintegrated by microbial
strains of Trichosporum and Arthrobacter in a time scale of
weeks. Some growth of Aspergillus niger was found on
the surface of aromatic polyesters.15 Because no con-
trol samples were tested and the degradation test meth-
ods used were very basic, the results were considered
not completely convincing. On the contrary, aliphatic
polyester is considered to be susceptible to microbial
attack. Aliphatic polyester degradation is seen as a two-
step process: the first is depolymerization, or surface
erosion. The second is enzymatic hydrolysis, which pro-
duces water-soluble intermediates that can be assimi-
lated by microbial cells.23
In order to solve the problem of aromatic polyes-
ter non-degradability, aliphatic-aromatic co-polyesters
A Review of Plastic Waste Biodegradation
were made. The idea was that by introducing aliphatic
components into aromatic polyester, its hydrolytic sus-
ceptibility should be increased.19 Raw materials consist-
ing of copolyesters of 1,4-butanediol, terephthalic acid
and adipic acid (BTA-copolyesters) are preferentially
used for commercial biodegradable copolyesters. The
greater the fraction of terephthalic acid, the lower the
rate of biodegradation of the copolyesters. In biodegra-
dation assaying of copolyesters, Thermomonospora fusca
DSM43793 was used. Copolyester has been observed
to be degraded in mineral media within days,20 and
films, approximately 90-µ m thick, were totally disinte-
grated within 7 days on agar plates at 55◦ C. A detailed
analysis of the intermediate and final products from
the degradation of the commercial, aliphatic-aromatic
copolyester, Ecoflex, was undertaken by Witt et al.35
using GC-MS measurements. Similar to the process of
aliphatic polyester degradation from depolymerization,
aromatic and aliphatic oligomers are intermediates that
are, at least, slightly water-soluble and can be metab-
olized by microorganisms. However, final degradation
of longer aromatic oligomers has not been achieved sig-
nificantly. This aspect needs further study.
4.2. Degradation of Polyurethane
Polyurethane (PUR) is commonly utilized as a con-
stituent material in many products including furni-
ture, coating, construction materials, fibers, and paints.
Structurally, PUR is the condensation product of
polyisocyanate and polyol having intramolecular ure-
thane bonds (carbonate ester bond, -NHCOO-).29
The urethane bond in PUR has been reported to be
susceptible to microbial attack.25 The hydrolysis of
ester bonds in PUR is postulated to be the mecha-
nism of PUR biodegradation. The breakdown products
of the biodegradation are derived from polyester seg-
ment in PUR when ester bonds are hydrolyzed and
cleaved.25
Three types of PUR degradation have been identified
in literature: fungal biodegradation, bacterial biodegra-
dation and degradation by polyurethanase enzymes.13
For example, four species of fungi, Curvularia sene-
galensis, Fusarium solani, Aureobasidium pullulans and
Cladosporium sp, were obtained from soil and found to
degrade ester-based polyurethane.10 Kay et al.18 isolated
and investigated 16 different bacteria in their ability
to degrade PUR. In another comprehensive study in
Japan, PUR was biodegraded as a sole carbon and ni-
Y. Zheng et al.
trogen source by Comamonas acidovorans.1,24 To purify
and characterize polyurethanase enzymes, the growth
of Pseudomonas chlororaphis, Comamonas acidovorans, and
Pseudomonas fluorescens on polyurethane has been pre-
viously studied Two kinds of PUase enzyme were iso-
lated and characterized by Howard et al.14 Allen et al.3
and Vega et al.33 These were shown to be a cell-associated
membrane bound PU-esterase and an extra-cellular PU-
esterase. An investigation of the action of these two en-
zymes during the polyurethane biodegrading is quite
helpful for an increased understanding of the mecha-
nism of polyurethane biodegradation. These two en-
zymes play different roles in polyurethane biodegra-
dation. The membrane bound PU-esterase provides
cell-mediated access to the hydrophobic polyurethane
surface. Then the extracellular PU-esterase sticks on
the surface of the polyurethane. Under these enzy-
matic actions, bacteria could adhere to the surface of
polyurethane and hydrolyze PU substrate to metabo-
lites. Results obtained by Nakajima-Kambe et al.24
and Howard et al.14 indicate that the polyurethane
biodegradation was due to the hydrolysis of ester
bonds.
In an experimental study conducted by the authors
of this review to obtain a simple culture medium for en-
gineering application, the effects of YES (Yeast extract
salts) medium components on polyurethane (Impranil
DLN) biodegradation by Pseudomonas chlororaphis were
investigated.37 The results showed that Pseudomonas
chlororaphis could grow and degrade Impranil DLN as a
sole carbon and nitrogen source in the modified YES
medium with no additional carbon and nitrogen source,
yeast extract, NH4 Cl and gelatin. However, the bacte-
ria grew much better and degraded more Impranil DLN
in the YES medium with the addition of gelatin than
in the one without gelatin, indicating some induction
effects may have occurred as a result of the presence
of the gelatin. After 10 days of incubation, the amount
of polyurethane degraded was about 50%, and bacterial
concentration reached the maximum of 1010 cfu/mL.
Additionally, FTIR spectroscopy was used to confirm
that the mechanism of polyurethane biodegradation
was the hydrolysis of the ester bond in polyurethane.
The decrease of the ratio of ester bond over ether
bond was also approximately 50%, which agreed with
the measured amount of polyurethane degraded. These
findings have potential benefits in future studies on
PUR biodegradation in landfills or in other plastic waste
treatment processes.
248
 4.3. Degradation of
Polyhydroxyalkanoates
Bacteria produce polyhydroalkanoates as energy stor-
age materials. A good example of this is polyhy-
droxybutyrate (PHB), which is made by numerous
microorganisms.26 PHAs are easily metabolized. The
enzymes responsible for the biodegradation, PHA de-
polymerases, have a wide substrate specificity.16 PHAs
and PHBs are recently finding commercial interest.
They may also find applications as blends and additives
similar to starch based plastics.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper reviewed recent research on plastic waste
biodegradation. To reduce the impact of plastic waste
on the environment, two main efforts have gener-
ally been pursued: one is to synthesize biodegradable
plastics, and the other to isolate selected microorgan-
isms to biodegrade plastic wastes. Thermoplastics are
widely used as packaging materials. Traditionally, these
polyolefins are non-biodegradable. With the develop-
ment of biodegradable polyolefins synthesis, active
additives such as pro-oxidants and starch, a natural
biodegradable polymer, are added to synthetic plas-
tics to make them biodegradable. By photo or heat
degradation, high molecular mass materials are bro-
ken down to low molecular mass intermediates that
can be continuously biodegraded by microorganisms.
With more and more research on polyolefins’ biodegra-
dation, environmental pollution caused by packag-
ing non-biodegradable plastics could be reduced. Re-
search on thermoset plastics, such as polyester and
polyurethane, shows that they are biodegradable due
to ester bonds or amide bonds that are potentially
susceptible to hydrolytic cleavage. However, aromatic
polyester is resistant to microbial attack because of its
long aromatic oligomers. In order to achieve both good
mechanical properties and biodegradability, aliphatic-
aromatic copolyesters are synthesized. It has also been
discovered that another widely employed biodegrad-
able thermoset plastic, polyurethane, can be utilized
as a sole source of carbon and nitrogen by microor-
ganisms. With more and more research on plastic
waste biodegradation, practical solutions to environ-
mental problems caused by plastic waste will soon
emerge.
249
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Funding for the research was provided by Individ-
ual Discovery Grants from the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada awarded to
Dr. Ernest Yanful and to Dr. Amarjeet Bassi.
REFERENCES
[1] Akutsu, Y., Nakajima-Kambe, T., Nomura, N., and Nakahara, T.
1998. Purification and properties of a polyester polyurethane-
degrading enzyme from Comamonas acidovorans TB-35. Applied
and Environmental Microbiology. 64: 62–67.
[2] Alauddin, M., Choudkury, I. A., Baradie, M. A., Hashmi, M. S. J.
1995. Plastics and their machining: a review. Materials Processing
Technology. 54: 40–46.
[3] Allen, A. B., Hilliard, N. P., and Howard, G. T. 1999. Purification and
characterization of a soluble polyurethane degrading enzyme from
Comamonas acidovorans. Int. Biodeterioration & Biodegradation.
43: 37–41.
[4] Amass, W., Amass, A., Tighe, B. 1998. A review of biodegradable
polymers: Uses, current developments in the synthesis and char-
acterization of biodegradable polymers, blends of biodegradable
polymers and recent advances in biodegradation studies. Polymer
International. 47: 89–144.
[5] American Plastics Council Year End Statistics for 2004. (http://
www.americanplasticscouncil.org/s apc/docs/1700/1678.pdf)
[6] Avella, M., Bonadies, E., Martuscelli, E., and Rimedio, R. 2001.
European current standardization for plastic packaging recoverable
through composting and biodegradation. Polymer Testing. 20: 517–
521.
[7] Bonhomme, S., Cuer, A., Delort, A.-M., Lemaire, J., Sancelme, M.,
and Scott, C. 2003. Environmental biodegradation of polyethylene.
Polymer Degradation and Stability. 81: 441–452.
[8] Chiellini, E., Corti, A., and Swift, G. 2003. Biodegradation of
thermally-oxidized, fragmented low-density polyethylenes. Polymer
Degradation and Stability. 81(2): 341–351.
[9] Contat-Rodrigo, L., and Ribes-Greus, A. 1998. Mechanical behav-
ior of biodegradable polyolefines. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids.
235: 670–676.
[10] Crabbe, J. R., Campbell, J. R., Thompson, L., Walz, S. L., and Schultz,
W. W. 1994. Biodegradation of a colloidal ester-based polyurethane
by soil fungi. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 33:
103–113.
[11] EI-Shafei, H., EI-Nasser, N. H. A., Kansoh, A. L., and Ali, A. M. 1998.
Biodegradation of disposable polyethylene by fungi Streptomyces
species. Polymer Degradation and Stability. 62: 361–365.
[12] Ghosh, R. N., Adhikari, B., and Ray, B. C. 2004. Studies of printing
inks on starch blended and surface grafted polyethylene film for
flexible packaging. Indian Journal of Chemical Technology. 11(3):
357–366.
[13] Howard, G. T. 2003. Biodegradation of polyurethane: a review. In-
ternational Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 40: 245–252.
[14] Howard, G. T., Ruiz, C., and Hilliard, N. P. 1999. Growth of Pseu-
domonas chlororaphis on a polyester-polyurethane and the purifi-
cation and characterization of a polyurethanase-esterase enzyme.
International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 43: 7–12.
[15] Huang H. S., and Byrne, C. A. 1980. Biodegradable polymers: Pho-
tolysis and fungal degradation of poly (arylene keto esters). Journal
of Applied Polymer Science. 25: 1951–1960.
[16] Jaeger, K., Steinbuchel A., and Jendrossek, D. 1995. Substrate speci-
ficities of bacterial polyhydroxyalkanoate depolymerases and lipases:
bacterial lipases hydrolyze poly(ε-hydroxyalkanoates). Applied and
Environmental Microbiology. 61: 3113–3118.
A Review of Plastic Waste Biodegradation
[17] Jakubowicz, I. 2003. Evaluation of degradability of biodegradable
polyethylene (PE). Polymer Degradation and Stability. 80: 39–43.
[18] Kay, M. J., Morton, L. H. G., and Prince, E. L. 1991. Bacterial degra-
dation of polyester polyurethane. International Biodeterioration &
Biodegradation. 27: 205–222.
[19] Kint, D. and Munoz-Guerra, S. 1999. A review on the potential
biodegradability of poly (ethylene terephthalate). Polymer Interna-
tional. 44: 346–352.
[20] Kleeberg, I., Hetz, C., Kroppenstedt, R. M., Muller, R., J.,
and Deckwer, W. D. 1998. Biodegradation of aliphatic-aromatic
copolyesters by Thermomonospora fusca and other thermophilic
composite isolates. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 64(3):
1731–1735.
[21] Leaversuch, R. 2002. Biodegradable polyesters: Packaging goes
green. Plastics Technology Online. September 2002. Can be ac-
cessed at (http://www.plasticstechnology.com/articles/200209fa3.
html)
[22] Levefre, C., Mathieu, C., Tidjani, A., Dupret, A., Vander Wauven,
C., De Winter, and W., David, C. 1999. Comparative degradation by
microorganisms of terephthalic acid, 2,6-naphthalene dicarboxylic
acid, their esters and polyesters. Polymer Degradation and Stability.
64: 9–16.
[23] Muller, R. J., Kleeberg, I., and Deckwer, W. D. 2001. Biodegradation
of polyesters containing aromatic constituents. Journal of Biotech-
nology. 86: 87–95.
[24] Nakajima-Kambe, T., Onuma, F., Kimpara, N. 1995. Isolation
and characterization of a bacterium which utilizes polyester
polyurethane as a sole carbon and nitrogen source. FEMS Micro-
biology Letters. 129: 39–42.
[25] Nakajima-Kambe, T., Shigeno-Akutsu, Y., Nomura, N., Onuma, F.,
and Nakahara, T. 1999. Microbial degradation of polyurethane,
polyester polyurethanes and polyether polyurethanes. Applied Mi-
crobiology and Biotechnology. 51: 134–140.
[26] Nishida, H., and Tokiwa, Y. 1993. Distribution of poly (β-
hydroxybutyrate) and poly (ε-caprolactone) aerobic degrading mi-
croorganisms in different environments. Journal of Environmental
Polymer Degradation. 1: 227–233.
[27] Orhan, Y., and Buyukgungor, H. 2000. Enhancement of biodegrad-
ability of disposal polyethylene in controlled biological soil. Interna-
tional Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 45: 49–55.
Y. Zheng et al.
[28] Ratajska, M., and Boryniec, S. 1999. Biodegradation of some nat-
ural polymers in blends with polyolefins. Polymers for Advanced
Technologies. 10: 625–633.
[29] Sauders, J. H. and Frisch, K. C. 1964. Polyurethanes. In: Chem-
istry and Technology, Part II, Technology. Interscience Publishers,
New York.
[30] Scott, G. 1999. Polymers in modern life. In: Polymers and the Envi-
ronment. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK.
[31] Tokiwa, Y., and Suzuki, T. 1997. Hydrolysis of polyesters by lipases.
Nature. 270: 76–78.
[32] US EPA 2005. Municipal solid waste. United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency. (http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-
hw/muncpl/facts.htm).
[33] Vega, R. E., Main, T., and Howard, G. T. 1999. Cloning and ex-
pression in Escherichia coli of a polyurethane-degrading enzyme
from Pseudomonas fluorescens. International Biodeterioration &
Biodegradation. 43: 49–55.
[34] Wang, Y. Z., Yang, K. K., Wang, X. L., Zhou, Q., Zheng, C. Y.,
and Chen, Z. F. 2004. Agricultural application and environmen-
tal degradation of photo-biodegradable polyethylene mulching
films. Journal of Polymers and the Environment. 12(1): 7–
10.
[35] Witt, U., Einig, T., Yamamoto, M., Kleeberg, I., Deckwer, W.-D., and
Muller, R. 2001. Biodegradation of aliphatic-aromatic copolyesters:
evaluation of the final biodegradability and ecotoxicological im-
pact of degradation intermediates. Chemosphere. 44(2): 289–
299.
[36] Yamada-Onodera, K., Mukumoto, H., Katsuyaya, Y., Saiganji, A.,
and Tani Y. 2001. Degradation of polyethylene by a fungus. Peni-
cillium simplicissimum YK. Polymer Degradation and Stability. 72:
323–327.
[37] Zheng, Y. 2004. Experimental study of polyurethane biodegrada-
tion using Pseudomonas chlororaphis. M.E.Sc Thesis. University of
Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
[38] Zuchowska, D., Hlavata, D., Steller, R., Adamiah, W., and Meissner,
W. 1999. Physical structure of polyolefin-starch after ageing. Poly-
mer Degradation and Stability. 64: 339–346.
[39] Zuchowska, D., Steller, R., and Meissner, W. 1998. Structure and
properties of degradable polyolefin-starch blends. Polymer Degra-
dation and Stability. 60: 471–480.
250